As a former January (Jan) admit, I have many problems with the Jan. 25
Spectator
article: “January admits not granted need-blind status in admissions.” First of all, the article says that “that in past years the Jans have been even less diverse than they are now.” However, the article does not mention that the number of Jan admits has increased over the past years. Secondly, the article claims that “only 15 percent of this year’s Jans identify similarly [as students of color or international]; 72 percent identify as white.” The article looks at such a small sample size, which in turn inflates the presented data.
I personally know many Jans who have taken out student loans, or who are on financial aid. They do not consider themselves “overwhelmingly affluent and rich.” While the majority of January admits are not on scholarship nor have students loans, such economic privilege is not unique; this is Hamilton. Many of these students could be considered “overwhelmingly affluent and rich.” Such affluence is not exclusive to Jans. The way the facts are presented in the article leads readers to believe that January admits are different from the rest of the Hamilton population; this is untrue.
Like all students on the Hill, the Jans have worked incredibly hard to get here and continue to work hard while on campus. The difference is that they were so willing to attend Hamilton that they did whatever it would take to be here. This included spending the fall of their first year not at Hamilton. Not all Jans go to London. Some work on political campaigns, coach sports teams, and participate in other educational activities which do not require them to pay tuition.
I understand the intent of the article was to question the accuracy of the College’s need-blind policy in regard to January admission. But, to insinuate that we are not as smart or qualified as our peers because we “are not included in class profile statistics on Hamilton’s website” is disrespectful and not representative of who we are. Instead of addressing college policy, you have attacked the character of all Jans.
Being a January admit has shaped most of my college experience for better and worse. I understand the purpose of your article, but I feel you have implicated Jans negatively by contributing to the stigma that we are all rich and spoiled. The article further ostracizes a group of students that already feel alienated from the general student population, who falsely believe them to be sub-standard admits. Articles such as the one in last week’s issue contribute to this reputation and perpetuates these misconceptions.
